Sturbridge solar plans scaled back to skip review

STURBRIDGE 
In an attempt to get a proposed solar farm out of the Conservation Commission's jurisdiction, the project's proponents have cut the scope of the original proposal by nearly half.

Mohd and Nazee Aslami, doing business as Ariana Inc., originally came to the commission with a proposal for a 6-megawatt solar farm at 99 Shepard Road that would involve clearing 40 acres of a heavily wooded hillside to set up 27,000 solar panels and to construct a new service road.

However, Glenn E. Krevosky, owner and manager of EBT Environmental Consultants of Oxford, said Ariana has decided to “downsize” its original proposal so it can take it outside the commission's jurisdiction.

Mr. Krevosky said the concept now is in “the 4 megawatts range” and would involve fewer than 25 acres.

“There will be a reduction in the size of the project. That is a definite,” Mr. Krevosky said. “Now the discussion is to … move the project 200 feet away from wetland boundaries and, if that is done, it will take it out of the Conservation Commission's jurisdiction.”

The state reviews projects that are within 100 feet of wetlands. However, under a town bylaw, Sturbridge, through its Conservation Commission, gets to review projects within 200 feet of wetlands. If the proponents of a project go beyond 200 feet, they are not required to go to the commission for approval.

“It's not to say we wouldn't have concerns about the runoff coming off of there. We're still dealing with a very ledgy hillside. We are concerned about it,” Conservation Agent Glenn D. Colburn said. “Since our jurisdiction is the wetlands, they are kind of getting it away from us. We will review stuff outside the 200 feet if we feel its going to have an impact to our wetlands but, of course, the further away they get, the less likelihood that there would be any impact.”

Abutters from Shepard and Wallace roads have expressed concerns about how the solar farm might affect their property values and scenery. They are also concerned about the threat of flooding and possible danger to the natural habitat.

While he said a solar farm is a good project, Mr. Colburn said Shepard Road might not be the right place.

“I bet you if you polled the people that came in to the meeting, I would say 99 percent of them are opposed to this project. The other 1 percent is probably afraid to speak up,” Mr. Colburn said. “But if you asked it in a different sense, I bet 99 percent of them would be in favor of a solar project, just not in this particular spot. And I think that is quite valid.”

Mr. Colburn said it seems like a contradiction that the proponents are proposing to clear a mature forested hillside to make room for a solar farm.

“Typically, you would see a solar farm placed on an abandoned agricultural field or a capped town dump or something to that effect,” Mr. Colburn said. “But to actually denudate 40 acres on a hillside, it seems kind of counter-productive. You're building solar panels to cut back on greenhouse gases but … we're taking away 40 acres of forest to put in solar panels.”

The Conservation Commission will have its third public hearing on the matter at 7 p.m. Thursday at Veterans Hall in Town Hall. The two previous hearings were overflowing with concerned people, Mr. Colburn said.

“We had so many people at the last meeting on the 15th that we really couldn't conduct a meeting,” Mr. Colburn said. “People were out in the hallway. They were in an adjoining room. People were standing. So we continued the meeting to the 29th to present more information.”

As for where the Conservation Commission stands on this everchanging solar farm proposal, Mr. Colburn said it hasn't got enough information at this point for him to make a good guess.

Even though the solar farm proponents might avoid a ruling from the Conservation Commission and might not need their approval whatsoever, the matter still has to go to the Planning Board for a site plan review.